He spoke about the issue of disliked acts of the lighter kind (makruh tanzihi) and disliked acts of the heavier kind (makruh tahrimi).

The questioner : Good, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : For example, do you know that the jurists distinguish between the forbidden (haram) and the disliked (makruh), correct?

The questioner : Without a doubt.

The Shaykh : Fine, but this distinction is a later technical term. The Qur'an does not distinguish, do you understand this?

The questioner : The Qur'an does not distinguish between the forbidden and the disliked.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : The term "disliked" has several meanings.

The Shaykh : You have not answered in the manner we agreed upon. Does it distinguish or not?

The questioner : And the Sunnah is the same.

The Shaykh : Answer the question, may Allah forgive you.

The questioner : Our Shaykh, I am unable to answer.

The Shaykh : Answer the question. I said the Qur'an.

The questioner : ...

The Shaykh : I said the Qur'an.

The questioner : I do not know, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you with good. Let us pass over this. And you must know that the Qur'an says: meaning regarding the forbidden things... and adornment, and so on.

The questioner : Good, our Shaykh. I know what you said, but what I do not know is whether every verse in the Qur'an where this term appears...

The Shaykh : Whenever "disliked" is used in the Qur'an, it means forbidden. But among the jurists, some say that when "disliked" is used, it means forbidden (tahrimi) and not haram, and some say it means disliked (tanzihi), and this is the Shafi'i school. In any case, we are not discussing this here!

The questioner : Yes, our Shaykh.

The Shaykh : This is an interjection.

The questioner : Yes, to be fair, our Shaykh, they mention that "disliked" comes to mean prohibition, and they clarify that "disliked" comes in the opposite sense of the first, and the "disliked" as defined by the term...

The Shaykh : What is the difference between your current statement and my previous statement?

The questioner : Your previous statement now?

The Shaykh : What is the difference?

The questioner : I said that the jurists say "disliked of the lighter kind" and "disliked of the heavier kind."

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : And both are technical terms with them, our Shaykh!

The Shaykh : What is the difference, may Allah guide you, between what you said and what you said? Because now, when you said its meaning, you are saying something I did not say. While I was pointing out to you that there is a difference between the terminology of the Qur'an and the terminology of the jurists. And there is no harm in adopting a term for something, provided that it does not contradict the terminology of the Shari'ah. That is, it is not permissible for us to interpret the verses according to the Shafi'i terminology, for example, that the disliked is disliked of the lighter kind and not forbidden?

The questioner : That is not correct, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : The important point is that we say "gold jewelry" not in the general sense. The ring that is worn here is a ring, to use your expression, but it is not worn on the organ. We have the forbidden items by the texts, and we refer to them as "gold jewelry": the ring, the bracelet, and the necklace only.

The questioner : And for the man, our Shaykh, the anklet?

The Shaykh : We do not forbid it except by analogy. We are repeating this to you now regarding the texts.

The questioner : Good, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Because there is a difference: one we discussed in the text, and another we discussed in analogy. We say that analogy is a matter with conditions, and so on. Then, when is analogy resorted to? When we agree on the base of the analogy, correct? And if not, if we are not agreed on what we are analogizing to, then analogy is not applicable at all.

The questioner : With the opponent.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : With the opponent, it is not applicable.

The Shaykh : With the opponent, we are saying, well, this is also what I am telling you. What does the statement mean? I am saying this question comes after agreement on the base of the analogy. What is the base of the analogy? There are three types we mentioned. We are not agreed on this, correct?

The questioner : There is no doubt that we are not agreed.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : Not agreed.

The Shaykh : So if analogy is not applicable, this is the meaning of my statement and the meaning of your statement. So now, "gold jewelry," these three types, are these fewer or are they permissible?

The questioner : Our Shaykh, this is the most commonly used of gold.

The Shaykh : I tell you, and Allah knows best, that this is the most commonly used. But is this usage derived from the guidance of the Wise Lawgiver, or from the prevalence of customs, desires, and traditions? This is a matter we are not obligated to delve into!

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : But in terms of usage, if a Muslim man wants to enjoy what Allah has made lawful for him of lawful gold for his women and his household, are the types more numerous than these three types we clarified for you?

The questioner : They are the most numerous, our Shaykh.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : These three are the most numerous.

The Shaykh : This contradicts your previous statement.

The questioner: And that is...

The Shaykh : Ten and more!

The questioner : Our Shaykh, I meant by ten... by your word, you forced me to answer with ten and twenty-two!

The Shaykh : Forgive me.

The questioner : These ten and twenty-two.

The Shaykh : Forgive me for what you said, that I forced you.
AThe student : May Allah forgive you, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Amen, yes.

The questioner : The ten or the twenty, all of them, do not exceed the forms of this existing thing.

The Shaykh : My brother, why do you return to the existing? This existing, Allah the Exalted and Majestic made it obligatory, and it is not something that requires discussion.

The questioner: No.

The Shaykh : This is reality. Fine, does this reality, within the bounds of the Shari'ah, judge it and restrict it?

The questioner : The Shari'ah does not restrict it!

The Shaykh : So why do you return to reality? I am now within the bounds of the Shari'ah. I adorn my wife and my daughter with forms and colors beyond the three. Can you say no? I will answer for you, and if I am wrong, correct me. You say you cannot, and you say you can. The interpretation of this ambiguity is: you cannot if you are restricted by reality, because that is how reality is; and I can if I depart from this reality. And this is what we, the people of the Sunnah and the community, are obligated to do: to depart from this reality and to be bound by the Wise Lawgiver. This is what is obligatory upon us. So why, may Allah bless you, do you resort to reality?

The questioner : Our Shaykh, I do not resort to reality except because...

The Shaykh : How, my brother? You say this is reality.

The questioner : Our Shaykh...

The Shaykh : How? Glory be to Allah. You are the one who said reality, and then you say I do not resort to reality. How?

The questioner : I said because, our Shaykh, it is the usage of clothing.

The Shaykh : Reality. What did you say? Reality, and then you say I do not resort to reality. May Allah forgive you. Fine, I return to my question. I am able to use the permissible gold within the bounds of my belief that gold jewelry is forbidden. I am able to use it in more than ten or up to twenty, or at least achieve a percentage more or less than what you are hovering around. I hope to receive the answer: am I able or not able?

The questioner : I say you are not able.

The Shaykh : Why?

The questioner : Because the use of gold does not exceed these things, except by a little.

The Shaykh : My brother, this is gold. May Allah guide you.

The questioner : Our Shaykh, prove to me its invalidity.
The Shaykh: Heh heh, good. This reminds me of a joke I tell my brother on some occasions. We had a noble Shaykh in Syria, in Damascus. Of course, at that time he was an old Shaykh like me, and I was a young man like you, without comparison, of course, heh heh.

The questioner : Yes, a Shaykh without naming him.

The Shaykh : The point is, heh heh, but he was, I mean, of a hot-tempered disposition, but he was brave. He was bold. He would say, "I am amazed by these Sufis and the followers of taqlid, and so on." They would say about the issue, "It is like this," I tell you, "No, this is not possible. He will return. What will he say?" He would say, "My brother, I mean, tell me this is farther than if I told you, 'Look with your own eyes, I am a human like your story, but I have the ability to do this and fly in the sky without a plane, without anything, just by moving my hand like this.' Do not say it is possible or not possible. I say, my brother, a brief word: say 'fly' and find me not flying. The problem is over. The call has fallen."

The questioner : Good, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : So I am now telling you that I am able to expand in the use of permissible gold for women, and I believe that the three types are the only forbidden ones. I am saying if my wife puts a gold coin here, this is usage.

The questioner : Where did you put it, our Shaykh?

The Shaykh: Here.

The questioner : On the button, I mean.

The Shaykh : On her chest.

The questioner : A button?

The Shaykh : On her chest. Do not argue. I told you here, I told you here, I will tell you wherever it is, because this is not the place for discussion!

The questioner : Do you consider it multiple forms, our Shaykh?

The Shaykh: What?

The questioner : Do you consider it multiple forms, this?

The Shaykh : I have finished my statement. May Allah guide you?

The questioner : No, you have not finished.

The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. You are now occupying us with side matters. Where am I? I told you here. Why did you stop there?

The questioner : He needs to see.

The Shaykh : And then you move on and say.
The students: Heh heh heh.

The questioner : What is the obstacle? This is all discussion about usage.

The questioner : The other: He needs to see how you applied it.
The students: Heh heh.

The Shaykh : Heh heh, she is also adorning herself, heh heh, Allahu Akbar.

The questioner : The other: By fixing the microphone on the chest.The Shaykh .

The Shaykh : Ah, no, it is a visible problem, but this is evidence, not thinking about the use of the lawful.

The questioner: Our Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Not thinking.

The questioner : I take it off.
The students: Heh heh.

The Shaykh : Heh, and the turban too.

The questioner : Heh, no.

The Shaykh : How many pens are here?

The questioner: In the range of about twelve.

The Shaykh: Is it permissible for them to be...

The questioner: These.

The Shaykh: These.

The questioner: Of course, it is permissible, without a doubt.

The Shaykh: Is it permissible if you use them?

The questioner: It is permissible, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh: How many... You have restricted a vast portion of Allah’s mercy!

The questioner: Shaykh, you are counting twelve pens, but I am telling you, bracelets, forty bracelets, and even more have become common.

The Shaykh: What does this have to do with it, my brother? May Allah guide you!

The questioner: A type.

The Shaykh: What do you mean by type?

The questioner: I mean, if you have a thousand pens, you use the pen.

The Shaykh: Fine, but this pen, a thousand pens, is not what you are saying. A pen is a pen, whether it is an ink pen or a pencil; every name is "pen," but these are not types. I will tell you something else: one is made of gold and another is of a different type; it is a type and it is a type!

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: Are these not types?

The questioner: They are types, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh: Fine, a comb made of gold that you insert into your hair, you insert it anywhere; is this not a type?

The questioner: It is a type, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh: Fine, why are you narrowing a broad matter?

The questioner: I am not narrowing it, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh: So, are these types?

The questioner: If you want to count the comb as one type and the comb here as another type.

The Shaykh: No, no, no, comb, comb, comb.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: The comb, you will not call it a button.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: And a button, you will not call it a gold coin, and so on.

The questioner: But I say that all of these are lesser, and the necklace, the pendant, the bracelet, and the heart-shaped charm.

The Shaykh: Allow me, how do I say this is lesser? In terms of usage, it is not lesser if this is used more. I mean, the permissible types, if used, to be fair to you!

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: And the ranks of repetition of the word, in reality, the permissible types, if used, cannot be limited, cannot be limited!

The questioner: By Allah, allow me, O Shaykh, this issue that I mentioned is my last argument, my last argument!

The Shaykh: I have nothing to do with it; I want an argument.

The questioner: The presentation is better, better, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : I want to...

The Shaykh: How?

The questioner: I mean, the argument we are discussing now is based on prior information I have!

The Shaykh: But this information is based on legal evidence.

The questioner : Good, Shaykh.

The Shaykh: And what is based on your study of reality in the Muslim society, and especially since we have heard from you repeatedly and repeatedly, the reality is that what is used is less, what is used permissibly is less. We are telling you, our guest, in our capacity as Muslims and callers to the Book and the Sunnah, we develop reality, we do not follow reality.

The questioner: We develop the rejected reality.

The Shaykh: Now, I am putting a condition, as if it is a subject of disagreement?

The questioner: No, Shaykh, I said, Glory be to Allah, you forced me into this word, the same as your words, you are bound by it. I said disagreement!

The Shaykh: No, no, allow me!

The questioner: I said disagreement, I want to bring what I am convinced of, O Shaykh!

The Shaykh: And you, my brother, you say what you are convinced of, but do I disagree with you on this condition you set?

The questioner: Does my mentioning it imply that I disagree with it?

The Shaykh: Allow me, allow me, why don’t you answer me? Say no to what we agreed upon.

The questioner: I do not know if you disagree or if you did not notice, meaning you did not pay attention. I do not want to answer you honestly, O Shaykh!

The Shaykh: May Allah reward you with good, may Allah reward you with good, may Allah reward you with good.

The questioner : Indeed.

The Shaykh: But this does not bring understanding closer, may Allah bless you. I am far from your hearing. Why did you set the condition of "rejected"? Because I will disagree with it. You know for certain that we do not disagree on this, but we may disagree on what is rejected and what is acceptable, and this is the point of contention!

The questioner: But you said we develop reality, and that is a clear phrase.

The Shaykh: No, I seek refuge in Allah, bear witness to it, bear witness to it, because... May Allah forgive you.

The questioner: There is no power and no strength except in Allah.
The student: My Shaykh, we need a method, just one.

The Shaykh: Ah, okay.

The questioner: I said, what is the objection, O Shaykh, to me starting by mentioning the arguments I have?

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: To begin with.

The Shaykh: There is no objection on my part, but I ask you about your personal conviction?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: After reading my book and the responses that came to me, do you have anything new?

The questioner : Yes, my Shaykh.

The Shaykh: All right.

The questioner: I read the responses.

The Shaykh : No problem, no problem.

The questioner: I read some of the responses.

The Shaykh: My brother, I do not want an explanation, I do not want an explanation. I am asking you, do you have anything new?

The questioner: Enough, I do not want an explanation. If you go on like this, you do not explain in the necessity.

The Shaykh: It is as you wish.

The questioner: Enough, I am telling you, I do not want it. I am silent immediately if you speak.

The Shaykh: Allow me, allow me.

The questioner: Be patient, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh: My brother, may Allah bless you. Just as I bound you to the principle we agreed upon, you also bound me to it when you see me deviating from it!

The questioner: May Allah bless you, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh: You did not ask me a question and gave me a lecture. I said, look, I asked you a question and you gave me a lecture, and you did not commit to yes or no. But you do not come with questions to see if I deviated or not, while you came to me with questions repeatedly and repeatedly, and you deviate from what we agreed upon. Now I asked you, do you not think that what you have, if I agreed to your proposed presentation above, you brought something new that you had not previously mentioned? You said yes!

The questioner: Among those who responded.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: Among those who responded.

The Shaykh: Those who responded, or those who did not respond from the books of knowledge, do you understand? Do you have anything new?

The questioner: Regarding the issue, yes.

The Shaykh: Ah, yes. I am now, so that we do not widen the circle of the lecture, because that means we need to hear your lecture and hold a second session to respond to the lecture.

The questioner: By Allah.

The Shaykh : Allow me.

The questioner: By Allah, I prefer brevity, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: I prefer brevity, I bind myself to it.

The Shaykh: And what do I prefer!

The questioner: Our Shaykh.

The Shaykh: The one who set those rules for you, the one who set those rules and principles, does he prefer detail or brevity!

The questioner: O Shaykh, may Allah will it, your detail is a blessing, by permission.

The Shaykh: Haha, it does not come, it does not come. Do you want me to treat you as you treat me!

The questioner: O Shaykh, one of us is not from those who do not show mercy to our young ones!
The students: Haha.

The Shaykh: So woe to those who pray!

The questioner: True is the Great Allah.

The Shaykh: Is it permissible?